Would Hillary have campaigned in Wisconsin if Bush had won there twice?

[Mr. Illini]

George Bush came extremely close to winning Wisconsin in both 2000 and 2004. In 2000, Gore took it by about 5,000 votes. In 2004, Kerry by about 11,000 votes.

Yet, during the 2016 election, people frequently referred to a "blue wall" that included Wisconsin, as if it had been a titanium Democratic state forever.

This struck me as I was watching a video last week of interviews with Trump voters in Wisconsin. Of course it is anecdotal, but many said they voted for Obama twice because he was from the Midwest and therefore easier for them to relate to.

Given Obama's strong performances there following two very close Presidential cycles in the state, it seems that Obama may have masked over the larger trend that was going on in the state because he was a particularly good fit. Somehow, Clinton and the DNC missed this.

I wonder, if 2000 and 2004 had shifted just enough to give Wisconsin to Bush twice, how differently the state would have been viewed by the Clinton team in 2016 and by the media and pundits.

[Del Tachi]

Of course, because had Bush won WI in 2000 and 2004 it would be part of the:

Sun
Belt
Stack

[brucejoel99]

She would've campaigned there as often as she campaigned in Virginia... so, not at all.

[Sumner 1868]

I don't really see how Bush wins WI without picking up Oregon and Iowa as well.

[538Electoral]

Maybe?

[redeagleofficial]

Probably.  She still would have lost it as nobody showed up to her events

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

I don't really see how Bush wins WI without picking up Oregon and Iowa as well.

Only New Mexico went for Gore by smaller margins than Wisconsin went for Gore in 2000.
Wisconsin was the narrowest Kerry margin in 2004.

[morgankingsley]

No because then the rust belt would already be a R leaning set of swings and she would have lost all hope in humanity already, and tried to make it up for it with Dixieland

[Xing]

Perhaps, but if that were the case, even if she ended up winning Wisconsin by 2.4%, 4.9%, or 5.4% or something like that (while losing MI/PA), and Feingold had won by a similar margin, people would say that it's a Toss-Up at best for Democrats because muh 2004.

[SN2903]

No she's too arrogant .  She thought Trump had no chance.

[morgankingsley]

Perhaps, but if that were the case, even if she ended up winning Wisconsin by 2.4%, 4.9%, or 5.4% or something like that (while losing MI/PA), and Feingold had won by a similar margin, people would say that it's a Toss-Up at best for Democrats because muh 2004.

So pretty much Virginia

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

She was killing it in the polls up until the last week, when a bunch of Trump voters finally made up their mind. IIRC their internal polls indicated a Level 5 Extreme Emergency on the last day, but by then it was too late.